3D914s 914-6 SHO 3.2L v6, Build Thread - Project for sale. See classifieds Options

[Wilhelm]

This is the first I've been able to get back to the "black hole" since last week. After a couple hours of sanding, cutting, banging, I've cleared out the bulk of the filler to expose the metal around the edges that I have to work with.

It's as I thought. But there is enough there to do either a lap joint or a butt joint, depending on how badly mis-shaped the metal is. I feel a lot better at least knowing whats not behind there anymore. The filler is typically 3/8-1/2in thick!

Its also a given that the entire flare will have to be removed from this side. That's the next step.

I'd drill out all those frigging rivets. Their just gonna allow moisture to wick up and create rust spots and electrolysis problems due to aluminum and steel next to each other. Heat the metal with a torch while working a putty knife between the flare and the flare should pop right off. When it comes time to bond the flare back on either use epoxy or urethane panel adhesive with temporary screws to hold fender on. When cured unscrew the screws and massage adhesive into the screw holes. This typically will create a more likely to be bullet proof repair.

[3d914]

Its been a while but I haven't been slacking. . .
I stayed with just sanding for the time being, using 60 grit and an electric orbital sander. I'm comfortable with this technique and can accurately control how much I take off. On the flares I'm going down to the gel-coat (if its still called that) - its white in this case.

I've drilled out the rivets on the drivers side & removed the tire for better access. I've discovered that they did use some type of bonding material between the flare and the metal - as its apparent from the underside, even though there is a 1 1/2 - 2in overlap of metal. The material appears blackish in color, is very hard, and seems somewhat brittle. I've encountered some areas of this near the bottoms of the flare where they connect to the body panel.

So its not going to be just a matter of removing the rivets and filler and pulling off the flare. I'd like to be able to get them off without damaging them.

Ideally if this bonding agent is satisfactory, I'd be glad to leave it & the flares in place, and continue with FG cloth and resin on the outer part of the flare/fender. I also came across a combination bonding agent/filler called Dyna-Weld. It would be better to have this material between the flares and metal. But if I can't get them off without breaking them off, it will serve well as an outer filler/bonding agent.

[3d914]

Well, some good news.

I took a break from the back flares and decided to see whats under the front flares. Starting with the right-front, I found some good news. It appears this one was done correctly in that they used FG cloth and resin to bond/blend the outer flare to the body panel. I can still feel rivets underneath, but at least this technique should provide a better basis to work from.

If the left-front flare is the same, I'll plan on leaving them in place and just remove all the extra filler. It almost seems like they wanted to change the shape of the flares because all the nice radii are filled with putty to increase the radius. Weird!





I also checked on the underside, and here they also used cloth and resin to completely enclose the seam. Sure hope the left-front flare is the same.

[rhodyguy]

i think you're taking a real sensible approach to the flares. how was the trapped area behind the sealent? any rust?

k

[3d914]

rhodyguy,

No rust in the fender/flares at all so far. Its been real clean aside from the mediocre assembly in the rear. I'm sure it helped that the car has been limited to CA & AZ. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[3d914]

Well, I made some important progress this weekend. I set aside the sander and started getting measurements for the transmission and the cross-section of the engine bay. From this I feel I can get a good idea of engine fit. I've entered all the data into CAD and here is what I have so far.



The different colors should be obvious as to what they represent with the exception of the two blue lines. Those are the front-to-back limits of the SHO V6 engine relative to the forward face of the tranny - or in this case the adapter plate in front of the tranny. The upper part of the heads/intake over-hangs to the rear. I don't have the various heights yet.

I have a local contact that I'll be following up with to get some accurate dimensions of the engine. Once these are plugged in and I do a back view, I'll have a decent idea of what interferences I may have.

Keep you posted.

[3d914]

OK,

First let me say a big THANK YOU to Tom ( a local SHO rail owner) for allowing me access to his shop to get the necessary dimensions. Tom's been using SHO motors in his rails for years and has amassed a great deal of data and insight into these engines - including turbos & super-chargers. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/drooley.gif)

Here's how it came out. The engine of choice for a longitudinal mount would be the 3.2L used in the automatics. One main reason is that the 3.2 has a single auto-tensioning serpentine belt, whereas the 3.0L has two and require manual adjustment and more space.

Take a look at the final best-fit I can come up with.
Magenta - engine bay and body parts.
Red - 901 Tranny
Green - 24" dia wheel/tire
Blue - engine outline



Here's a few things I have to consider:

1. The centerline for the crank is just below the seam where the oil pan and block mate. This leaves the stock oil pan in place with no mods and out of harms way.
2. The 901 transaxle will need to be brought foward and down 1" in each direction. Its likely this will move backward as the adapter plate and clutch may require more depth than I allowed.
3. The angled part of the trunk will have to be removed and re-aligned up to match the adjacent vertical wall. That way an extra rib can be added to the trunk and it can still be sealed properly, with space for luggage.
4. The firewall at the seats will have to be modified. I don't mind eliminating this as I was going to do a custom back-pad anyway, and I never have my seat all the way back.
5. The center section of the forward part of the trunk lid will have to be cut to accommodate the intake & throttle body. The TB can be rotated vertically and air could be fed via a custom ram scoop. I'd even considering adjusting the engine height upward slightly so that the intake manifold can be exposed. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)
6. THe only other BIG downer on the whole deal is the weight. Fully dressed, this engine comes in at 500 lbs. That is first hand info, not second hand speculation.

Now the tough part. Do I proceed? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

[jasons]

Now the tough part. Do I proceed? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

Man, thats a lot of work for 220hp and 500lbs. Practical answer, I would do a suby. But if you want the challenge, then.......

[bryanc]

Have you given thought to either transverse mount with the SHO manual tranny? What about the Duratec 3.0 V6?

[3d914]

Bryan,

Yes, I've thought about both. No on the transverse. And the Duratec 3.0 is on my list of engines along with the EG33 and another Ford, the Essex 3.8L. I need to get a weight on the EG33 to compare. I know the Essex is cast-iron block, while the Duratec is alumiyumyum.

A strange thought occurred to me - what would it take to machine an aluminum block for the SHO motor? Probably more than I think.

I'll also have to get an idea of what some of the V8's weigh in at. If its comparable to those, then I'd go for it.

It may seem like a lot for 220HP, but I'm thinking down the road. In turbo or super-charged form, the SHO is good for upto 500hp or more.

Still thinking . . .

[3d914]

I'm having a hard time deciding since I'd really like to use the SHO, so I decided to wait and collect more data on my top engine choices before I commit to one. It may just be a process of elimination.

Here is my current list of potential swaps. The blue rows are top choices based on the data I've found so far.



I did get the remaining front flare sanded this weekend. So now I have a better scope of the repair work.

For the fronts I'm just going to remove the remaining filler; leave the existing bonded flare in place; leave the existing clothe and resin blend, and put added clothe and resin on the back side as extra precaution.

For the backs, I'm going to visit the body shop and see if they can give me some idea what the bonding material in the back is. If its acceptable, I'll leave the flares attached, but go through redoing all the blending and sealing of the front and back sides as it should have been done. If the bonding material isn't acceptable - they'll have to come off.

[Cevan]

I am no expert but 500hp and a 901 transaxle may not be compatible.

[3d914]

Are you sure? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolling.gif)

[6freak]

Are you sure? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolling.gif)

WHY WHY WHY cant you just put a flat 6 in the damn thing and drive the wheels off it .Your gonna dump a crappie ford motor in it have too much power and twist it all up and have to add stiffners and all that crap.and spend tons just to have it in the bone yard shortly after you wreck it !!!!!!!!! dont bendem mendem..good luck whatever you do.................... Just had to vent (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

[bryanc]

Are you sure? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolling.gif)

WHY WHY WHY cant you just put a flat 6 in the damn thing and drive the wheels off it .Your gonna dump a crappie ford motor in it have too much power and twist it all up and have to add stiffners and all that crap.and spend tons just to have it in the bone yard shortly after you wreck it !!!!!!!!! dont bendem mendem..good luck whatever you do.................... Just had to vent (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

'crappie ford' motors? Conan O'Brien really likes them Check this Video (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

[3d914]

Well - excuuuuse meeee!

If you can't stomach Ford's, then perhaps a Subi EG33 will suit you pallet.

Here's my fit check for the Subi EG33 (SVX) motor from dimensions Kent (914Helo) provided. This looks a lot more promising, fit wise. Especially since Ken't had the engine in his 914 and has verified the fit.

Still . . . it is tempting to try something no one else has done yet - even if it is a FORD! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/barf.gif)

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

EG33 Fit check:
(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-1191-1211425118.gif)

[Smitty911]

Are you sure? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolling.gif)

WHY WHY WHY cant you just put a flat 6 in the damn thing and drive the wheels off it .Your gonna dump a crappie ford motor in it have too much power and twist it all up and have to add stiffners and all that crap.and spend tons just to have it in the bone yard shortly after you wreck it !!!!!!!!! dont bendem mendem..good luck whatever you do.................... Just had to vent (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

'crappie ford' motors? Conan O'Brien really likes them Check this Video (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

Calls his motor the "RANCH" , cause that were the 220 Horses live. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

Smitty

[6freak]

Are you sure? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolling.gif)

WHY WHY WHY cant you just put a flat 6 in the damn thing and drive the wheels off it .Your gonna dump a crappie ford motor in it have too much power and twist it all up and have to add stiffners and all that crap.and spend tons just to have it in the bone yard shortly after you wreck it !!!!!!!!! dont bendem mendem..good luck whatever you do.................... Just had to vent (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

'crappie ford' motors? Conan O'Brien really likes them Check this Video (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

Calls his motor the "RANCH" , cause that were the 220 Horses live. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif)

Smitty

Ford Chevy Subi .How bout a Cummins Turbo deisel600 pounds of torque 300 ponys (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif) .Its your car and money do what YOU want to! I guess i just hate see`n um get cut up............... seriously good luck

[3d914]

Come on guys - give me a break. If you've read any of the previous posts you'd know that this is not my first 914 (my 4th) and that I purposely picked a delinquent car and not a nice roller to do this Non-Standard conversion on.

(Previous three 914's)
(IMG:http://www.pelicanparts.com/MotorCity/3d914/914fountainLF.jpg)
(IMG:http://www.pelicanparts.com/MotorCity/3d914/Signal74_frlt.jpg)
(IMG:http://www.pelicanparts.com/MotorCity/3d914/3D914_76b.jpg)

I want, as much as anyone else, to maintain those nice stock 914's as much as possible - which is the very reason I sold my previous Ravenna beauty and didn't do a conversion (not even a Porsche six) on her. And I was careful to sell her to someone who intended to return her closer to stock that I had.

I can assure you this is not going to be an everyday "hack job". In fact I'm going to great lengths to undo someone else's "hack job". So let's keep this all in perspective - shall we!

Here's an eye-opener link you need to view if you think that non-porsche motivation in 914's is an uncommon thing. Keep in mind also that this link is over three years old.

Enjoy!

Now back to the show!

[SirAndy]

I am no expert but 500hp and a 901 transaxle may not be compatible.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) the 901 won't hold up to the torque ...

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif) Andy